Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

Jeff V. Merkey
2006-07-31T21:29:04Z

Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
>> On 7/31/06, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Its well accepted that reiserfs3 has some robustness problems in the
>>> face of physical media errors. The structure of the file system and the
>>> tree basis make it very hard to avoid such problems. XFS appears to
>>> have
>>> managed to achieve both robustness and better data structures.
>>>
>>> How reiser4 compares I've no idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> Citation?
>>
>> I ask because your clam differs from the only detailed research that
>> I'm aware of on the subject[1]. In figure 2 of the iron filesystems
>> paper that Ext3 is show to ignore a great number of data-loss inducing
>> failure conditions that Reiser3 detects an panics under.
>>
>> Are you sure that you aren't commenting on cases where Reiser3 alerts
>> the user to a critical data condition (via a panic) which leads to a
>> trouble report while ext3 ignores the problem which suppresses the
>> trouble report from the user?
>>
>> *1) http://www.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/iron-sosp05.pdf
>
>
> Hi Gregory, Wikimedia Foundation and LKML?
> How's Wikimania going. :-)
>
> What he says is correct. I have seen some serious issues with
> reiserfs in terms of stability and
> data corruption. Resier is however FASTER, but the statement is has
> robustness issues is accurate.
> I was using reiserfs but we opted to make EXT3 the default for Solera
> appliances, even when using Suse 10
> due to issues I have seen with data corruption and hard hangs on RAID
> 0 read/write sector errors. I have
> stopped using it for local drives and based everything on EXT3. Not
> to say it won't get there eventually, but
> file systems have to endure a lot of time in the field and deployment
> befor they are ready for prime time.
>

Correction,

That's "MediWiki" appliances. Two many transposed acronyms...

www.wolfmountaingroup.com

:-)

Jeff

> The Wikimedia appliances use Wolf Mountain, and I've tested it for
> about 4 months with few problems, but
> I only use it for hosting the Cherokee Langauge Wikipedia. It's
> performance is several magnitudes better
> than either EXT3 or ReiserFS. Despite this, for vertical wiki
> servers, its ok to go out with, folks can specifiy
> whether they want appliances with EXT3, Reiser, or WMFS, but iit's a
> long way from being "cooked"
> completely, though it does scale to 1 exabyte FS images.
> Reiser does have issues still, and I hestitate to standardize on it
> until I stop seeing reports from the field about
> corruption and failover issues.
>
> Jeff
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>